D forbearance(Official backing of libs)

[Jason Jeffory via Digitalmars-d]

On Saturday, 2 January 2016 at 00:56:42 UTC, tsbockman wrote:
> On Saturday, 2 January 2016 at 00:20:37 UTC, Jason Jeffory 
> wrote:
>> I think maybe one of the problems with D is that there seems 
>> to be no focused backing of official d libs that are required 
>> to create apps.
>>
>> e.g., GUI, Audio, Graphics, etc...
>>
>> If the D community could decide to officially support(with a 
>> distinct web page for such things) such libraries, real 
>> progress might be made.
>>
>> So much work is done on the compiler itself but most of the 
>> actually things required to make real world use of the 
>> compiler are neglected, It's left up to individuals to do the 
>> work and make all the choices.
>>
>> But there is a different mentality that happens when it's 
>> "Official". Others are more willing to support, develop, and 
>> use it.
>>
>> Is this at all possible in the D community?
>
> Making a competitive GUI library is a MASSIVE task. While there 
> are some usable options available for D currently, I think the 
> most desirable solution is to make a high quality Qt binding.
>
> Various people have looked into doing so in the past, but I 
> think they were stalled by D's immature C++ interop. There have 
> been great strides forward in this area recently, and work is 
> ongoing. I'd bet a Qt binding will be viable within a year or 
> two, if it's not already.
>
> As to graphics - it depends on your use case. If you're 
> thinking of 3D simulations and games, I was under the 
> impression that the D ecosystem already covers the basics 
> (OpenGL, SDL, SFML) fairly well.
>
> I'm not sure about audio.
>
> More generally, though - there is a lot of work going into the 
> compiler and the standard library because they need it quite 
> badly. With basic issues like safe non-GC memory management yet 
> unresolved, I don't think it would yet be beneficial to D in 
> the long run to shift attention away towards other parts of the 
> ecosystem.
>
> The C++ interop, especially, will do far more to expand the D 
> ecosystem than the relatively small team working on it could 
> possibly accomplish by just writing more D libraries.

I think you misunderstand. I realize that D has a ton of library 
solutions... I am talking about having the "top dogs" come out 
and decide to support one or the other "officially" and try to 
turn it into something that people can use knowing that it is 
"supported".

D, as a compiler, might be amazing but without any proper tools 
to make it do things that are common, it won't be used much. By 
proper, I mean "officially supported". (basically it means Walter 
and Andrei come out and decide to support one of the current 
packages or to start the push on a new one)